Tubes tied?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatMan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
CatMan:
If you are a catholic, is having your tubes tied a sin?
Click to expand...
It’s a sin even if you’re not Catholic.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Instead of focusing on what you can’t do, focus on the gift of love God has given us, i.e. focus on what you can and should do.

Love between a married couple is the complete giving of oneself to another - this is in fact learning the complete love we will share with God in heaven. Because there is no greater love than giving completely of oneself, to artificially prevent this giving from occurring is a sin.

Every responsible couple has to think about the size of family they think they can raise and support, but there are ways to accomplish this planning without ruining the act of fully giving of oneself to another.

JP II said this better than I - and wrote about it. Understanding the gift God has given us makes this easier to figure out IMHO.
 
40.png
mlchance:
It’s a sin even if you’re not Catholic.

– Mark L. Chance.
Click to expand...
Well said.

There’s also subtle wisdom in awalt’s answer.
 
40.png
CatMan:
If you are a catholic, is having your tubes tied a sin?
Click to expand...
“The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).” (Catechism of the Catholic Church,** 2399)**

Now that you have knowledge that having your tubes (direct sterilization)tied for the purpose of preventing pregnancy is wrong (morally unacceptable), yes, to willfully proceed with this procedure would constitute [serious] sin.

**“**For a *sin *to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.” (CCC 1857)

“Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.

Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.” (CCC 1855)
 
i can think of an instance where it might not be a sin. if i understand correctly, a woman who had multiple ectopic pregnancies can be counseled to have the tubes cut and sealed because the chances of another ectopic pregnancy are so extremely high, and it may not be caught in time again to save her life.

even after successful treatment of prostate cancer, sometimes the prostate is removed because the previous cancer was so aggressive, and in doing so effectively sterilizes the man.

the same applies with recurring cervical cancer and such. but again, these are for medical reasons. i dont think the church would force people to remain completely fertile if it can seriously jepordize their life or result in death.
 
40.png
BioCatholic:
i can think of an instance where it might not be a sin. if i understand correctly, a woman who had multiple ectopic pregnancies can be counseled to have the tubes cut and sealed **because the chances of another ectopic pregnancy are so extremely high, and it may not be caught in time again to save her life. **

even after successful treatment of prostate cancer, sometimes the prostate is removed because the previous cancer was so aggressive, and in doing so effectively sterilizes the man.

the same applies with recurring cervical cancer and such. but again, these are for medical reasons. i dont think the church would force people to remain completely fertile if it can seriously jepordize their life or result in death.
Click to expand...
A *potential *serious/life threatening health risk associated with a possible future pregnancy does not meet the conditions under which sterilization may be performed, i.e., it would still be illicit to perform a tubal ligation with the sole purpose to prevent future pregnancy.
 
40.png
BioCatholic:
i can think of an instance where it might not be a sin. if i understand correctly, a woman who had multiple ectopic pregnancies can be counseled to have the tubes cut and sealed because the chances of another ectopic pregnancy are so extremely high, and it may not be caught in time again to save her life.

even after successful treatment of prostate cancer, sometimes the prostate is removed because the previous cancer was so aggressive, and in doing so effectively sterilizes the man.

the same applies with recurring cervical cancer and such. but again, these are for medical reasons. i dont think the church would force people to remain completely fertile if it can seriously jepordize their life or result in death.
Click to expand...
From what I understand it is not acceptible to ever be directly sterilized. If sterilization happens as a result of a life-saving operation (the intent was not sterilization), that’s a different case altogether and not what the poster was asking.
 
40.png
BioCatholic:
i dont think the church would force people to remain completely fertile if it can seriously jepordize their life or result in death.
Click to expand...
The church expects people with life jeapordizing fertility to abstain.

cheddar
 
St. Francis DeSales (“An Introduction to the Devout Life”) had this to say “The procreation of children is the first and principal purpose of marriage, and no one may ever, without sinning, depart from the due order which that end requires. This holds even at times when conception cannot take place because of some condition or circumstance, such as sterility or pregnancy.” (I should mention that he was writing on the sanctity of the marriage bed).

Hope this helps (it helped me) 😃
God bless,
k
 
BioCatholic wrote:

“if i understand correctly, a woman who had multiple ectopic pregnancies can be counseled to have the tubes cut and sealed because the chances of another ectopic pregnancy are so extremely high, and it may not be caught in time again to save her life.”

In the case of ectopic pregnancy, the surgery that protects the fallopian tube by “removing” (i.e. killing) the baby is forbidden, because the intent is to kill the baby. The surgery that saves the mother’s life by removing the damaged tube, with the side effect of killing the baby, is allowed, because it is not a deliberate abortion.

I would guess, with my limited medical knowledge, that the only way a woman could have more than two ectopic pregnancies is if she had the first, forbidden kind of surgery. I’m medically literate, but not an OB-GYN!

If you search the “Ask an Apologist” forum, you can learn all about it; that’s where I learned it.
 
Is it a sin for me to marry a woman who already had her tubes tied?
 
Racer X:
Is it a sin for me to marry a woman who already had her tubes tied?
Click to expand...
No, the sin is her’s when she tied her tubes. Before you have the Sacrament of Marriage you both should have an opportunity to participate in the Sacrament of Reconcilliation (assuming she is Catholic) and she will have an opportunity to be absolved of that sin.

You must continue in your marriage without artificial contraception, and every marital act must be open to life.
 
40.png
Shiann:
No, the sin is her’s when she tied her tubes. Before you have the Sacrament of Marriage you both should have an opportunity to participate in the Sacrament of Reconcilliation (assuming she is Catholic) and she will have an opportunity to be absolved of that sin.

You must continue in your marriage without artificial contraception, and every marital act must be open to life.
Click to expand...
Remember, the Church does not require that you reverse a sterilization procedure (tubal ligation or vasectomy, etc).
 
40.png
Isidore_AK:
Remember, the Church does not require that you reverse a sterilization procedure (tubal ligation or vasectomy, etc).
Click to expand...
Spot on!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top